IP
Kekayaan Intelektual
Who owns what the model produced, and what it was trained on.
Intellectual property law decides two separate questions in AI: who owns the output, and whether the training data was used lawfully.
On output: the default position in most jurisdictions is that a purely machine-generated work may not attract copyright at all, because there is no human author. Where a person directs the work, the result can be protected. The gap is why AI-assisted work keeps a human in the loop on final creative judgement.
On training: this is actively litigated and jurisdiction-specific, and the answers are still moving. The practical guidance for an organisation is to record where material came from, keep licences, and be able to answer a provenance question. The organisations that get asked are the ones that cannot.
Related terms
Compliance
Meeting the legal rules that apply to what you built, in the place you built it.
Dataset
A collection of examples used to train, evaluate, or ground a system.
Data Governance
The rules and habits that decide what data exists, who may use it, and how long it lives.
AI
A moving label, not a technology. It points at whatever computers have newly learned to do well.
Open Source
Software whose licence says what you may do with it, and what you must share.
Want this working inside your team?
It starts with one conversation about your workflow.